Value - Some Worthless Questions.
Posted by: Adam Meredith on 28 September 2005
In fact - it all ties in with a debate I wanted to start on the foundations of value.
Product X contains a mystery chip and a magnet - transforms the sound of your system
Product Y contains diamond resonance controlling dust, gold screws, 4 of the last 527 remaining legendary Rhondidium MosValves (as developed by NASA but dropped as being uneconomic) and sounds surprisingly mediocre.
Product Z contains fairly ordinary wires, off the shelf components but took one man three lifetimes to develop - sounds two lifetimes out of date.
Product 2 required 729 PhD students to design and is as good as an iPod.
Product iLLpo9 was knocked up on the back of a fag packet by a hifi world acknowledged genius and so on.
What determines value, when do we feel ripped off? Why do we not like "found art" and pay more for a painting that took a week to paint than a brick wall that took two to construct?
Why is a diamond more valuable than a petrified turd?
Does the mind rule the body - I dunno.
Product X contains a mystery chip and a magnet - transforms the sound of your system
Product Y contains diamond resonance controlling dust, gold screws, 4 of the last 527 remaining legendary Rhondidium MosValves (as developed by NASA but dropped as being uneconomic) and sounds surprisingly mediocre.
Product Z contains fairly ordinary wires, off the shelf components but took one man three lifetimes to develop - sounds two lifetimes out of date.
Product 2 required 729 PhD students to design and is as good as an iPod.
Product iLLpo9 was knocked up on the back of a fag packet by a hifi world acknowledged genius and so on.
What determines value, when do we feel ripped off? Why do we not like "found art" and pay more for a painting that took a week to paint than a brick wall that took two to construct?
Why is a diamond more valuable than a petrified turd?
Does the mind rule the body - I dunno.
quote:Originally posted by Adam Meredith:
Many years ago I had a pocket calculator. The next model up (which cost quite a bit more) had 2 additional function buttons situated in the top row.
One day the facia unpeeled - revealing below the metal two patches which, when pressed, accessed the additional functions. A lesson in effective production and marketing.
Adam, please tell me where the secret button on my 5x to turn it into a CDS3 is?
Deane
I can't help but think that you are imagining the term "tart" was used in a derogatory sense which was never intended. If it adds to your sense of personal outrage we even segregate "the type" into "mini-tarts" (under 10s), "pop-tarts" (11-16), (just) "tarts" (18-40-something) and "old tarts" (over 50s).
Perhaps the problem here is a matter of English usage? A "tart" in our parlance is simply a (more or less) provocatively dressed girl, or a younger or older woman. Despite the label (always applied with a knowing smile) we are no more dismissive of "the type" than you obviously are. We (my wife and I) just find "the type" rather amusing for their enhanced interest in clothes, shoes, hairstyles and jewellery. It is merely a stereotypical type we recognise. Seen everywhere inhabiting the pavement outside jewellery shops, standing at jewellery stalls at markets or peering into the glass counters of charity shops. They are simply more obviously fixed on their appearance than most other people.
I wonder if you would you be just as protective of our term "bikers"? Those with foolishly wide handlebars and footrests? So popular over here as they ride down the middle of the road on incredibly-expensive, modified, Harley birthing chairs in large groups? Or bald "aging hippies" with pony tails? Who look like mafia hit men or (much more likely) very old and tired rock musicians? We find these "types" just as amusing in a "wouldn't be without them" sort of way. But doesn't everybody?
I can't help but think that you are imagining the term "tart" was used in a derogatory sense which was never intended. If it adds to your sense of personal outrage we even segregate "the type" into "mini-tarts" (under 10s), "pop-tarts" (11-16), (just) "tarts" (18-40-something) and "old tarts" (over 50s).
Perhaps the problem here is a matter of English usage? A "tart" in our parlance is simply a (more or less) provocatively dressed girl, or a younger or older woman. Despite the label (always applied with a knowing smile) we are no more dismissive of "the type" than you obviously are. We (my wife and I) just find "the type" rather amusing for their enhanced interest in clothes, shoes, hairstyles and jewellery. It is merely a stereotypical type we recognise. Seen everywhere inhabiting the pavement outside jewellery shops, standing at jewellery stalls at markets or peering into the glass counters of charity shops. They are simply more obviously fixed on their appearance than most other people.
I wonder if you would you be just as protective of our term "bikers"? Those with foolishly wide handlebars and footrests? So popular over here as they ride down the middle of the road on incredibly-expensive, modified, Harley birthing chairs in large groups? Or bald "aging hippies" with pony tails? Who look like mafia hit men or (much more likely) very old and tired rock musicians? We find these "types" just as amusing in a "wouldn't be without them" sort of way. But doesn't everybody?
quote:Originally posted by Nime:
Deane
I can't help but think that you are imagining the term "tart" was used in a derogatory sense which was never intended. If it adds to your sense of personal outrage we even segregate "the type" into "mini-tarts" (under 10s), "pop-tarts" (11-16), (just) "tarts" (18-40-something) and "old tarts" (over 50s).
Perhaps the problem here is a matter of English usage? A "tart" in our parlance is simply a (more or less) provocatively dressed girl, or a younger or older woman. Despite the label (always applied with a knowing smile) we are no more dismissive of "the type" than you obviously are. We (my wife and I) just find "the type" rather amusing for their enhanced interest in clothes, shoes, hairstyles and jewellery. It is merely a stereotypical type we recognise. Seen everywhere inhabiting the pavement outside jewellery shops, standing at jewellery stalls at markets or peering into the glass counters of charity shops. They are simply more obviously fixed on their appearance than most other people.
I wonder if you would you be just as protective of our term "bikers"? Those with foolishly wide handlebars and footrests? So popular over here as they ride down the middle of the road on incredibly-expensive, modified, Harley birthing chairs in large groups? Or bald "aging hippies" with pony tails? Who look like mafia hit men or (much more likely) very old and tired rock musicians? We find these "types" just as amusing in a "wouldn't be without them" sort of way. But doesn't everybody?
Fair points.
Interesting
In a way, the value of something is basically what someone is prepared to pay for it in general terms, not what YOU might think it's worth. Second hand cars come to mind here.
IMHO so much of the perceived value of something, IS based around current popularity/fashion, peer group approval, status, reputation, (which includes myth) snob appeal, and the 'it costs more so it must be better aspect'.
I heard a NAP 500 which Cost AU$40k, but to my ears, whilst very good, its sound would be worth approx AU$10k as compared to other products at that price point (AU$10k) I have heard in the Australian market, and no more, therefore I have no interest in buying one - assuming I could afford it - whereas those with a much higher disposable income may consider it good value.
Very much a subjective judgement then. IMV, as regards HiFi, value is when I can get a sound/performance that is truly satisfying, AND leaves money left over for other interests/balance in life. Additionaly, once one enters the realms of the law of diminishing returns (which again must vary for everyone as regards where that point begins) most things cease to be 'valuable' to me.
Admittedly I'm somewhat idealistic, but old enough to also adopt more of a pragmatic approach, as I have seen more than a few highly regarded and very expensive HiFi products over the years become virtually worthless when their reputation/popularity changed/waned. Or when you come to trade them in; what was 'this most amazing blah, blah, blah' diatribe from ones dealer, becomes, 'sorry, this is all we can offer you, as it's nowhere near as good as this 'new' much better model', etc, etc....I'm sure we've all been there on that one...
Best Regards
John...
In a way, the value of something is basically what someone is prepared to pay for it in general terms, not what YOU might think it's worth. Second hand cars come to mind here.
IMHO so much of the perceived value of something, IS based around current popularity/fashion, peer group approval, status, reputation, (which includes myth) snob appeal, and the 'it costs more so it must be better aspect'.
I heard a NAP 500 which Cost AU$40k, but to my ears, whilst very good, its sound would be worth approx AU$10k as compared to other products at that price point (AU$10k) I have heard in the Australian market, and no more, therefore I have no interest in buying one - assuming I could afford it - whereas those with a much higher disposable income may consider it good value.
Very much a subjective judgement then. IMV, as regards HiFi, value is when I can get a sound/performance that is truly satisfying, AND leaves money left over for other interests/balance in life. Additionaly, once one enters the realms of the law of diminishing returns (which again must vary for everyone as regards where that point begins) most things cease to be 'valuable' to me.
Admittedly I'm somewhat idealistic, but old enough to also adopt more of a pragmatic approach, as I have seen more than a few highly regarded and very expensive HiFi products over the years become virtually worthless when their reputation/popularity changed/waned. Or when you come to trade them in; what was 'this most amazing blah, blah, blah' diatribe from ones dealer, becomes, 'sorry, this is all we can offer you, as it's nowhere near as good as this 'new' much better model', etc, etc....I'm sure we've all been there on that one...
Best Regards
John...
One day in the far distant future acne-free youths will study this forum for A-level IT History. Our virtual scribblings will be analysed in great depth with relevance to early 21st Century attitudes and norms. What will they make of the enigma that is DeanneF? 